Slashdot Mirror
Hacked iPhones Confirmed As Bricking With Latest Update
mhollis writes "Field experience has confirmed that if you have a hacked iPhone, it will become an iBrick if you use Software Update to install the latest update on your iPhone. The BBC reports: '[Apple's] warning has now proved correct as many owners are reporting their phones no longer work following installation of the update. Apple requires iPhone owners to take out a lengthy contract with AT&T in the United States but there are a number of programs on the net that unlock the device for use with other networks.' The only 'solution' is to unhack your iPhone."
iDidn't buy one so iDon't care about iT.
It reminds me very much of the hacks that went on with the PSP a while back, whereby you could "brick" your shiny new console if you didn't know what you were doing with firmware updates. That one was finally solves by a hack involving accessing the service mode via a modified battery of all things!
As much as I hate AT&T, Apple chose to partner with them to distribute and provide cellular service for the iPhone. Given all the nefarious and legally questionable stuff AT&T has done over the years, are we really that surprised that they/Apple are taking active measure to prevent people from taking their iPhone to other providers?
I like a lot of Apple's products, but won't buy an iPhone until they are available through other providers. ATT& is pure, unadulterated evil.
Message contains 1 attachment: spam.gif
I suggest attaching a nasty note and lobbing them through Apple's iWindows.
These stories are free but worth money.
This is reminiscent of DirecTV's Black Sunday - if I remember right, they put out an update on Superbowl Sunday that killed hacked receivers, and a good portion of unhacked receivers in the process.
I'm sick and tired of all the Apple bashing that hasn't yet taken place.
Look, Bricking hacked iPhones is the ONLY way to protect the AT&T network from collapsing under the weight of millions of replicating parasites and virii introduced into the carefully nurtured and fragile telecommunication ecosystem.
Also, if Apple does NOT brick the hacked iPhones, it will go bankrupt and we will all be condemned to using old 386 pcs with DOS 5.0 for our computing needs.
Also, the police might follow their example and stop investigation child abuse allegations too. WON'T YOU THINK OF THE ABUSED CHILDREN?
Thank you and death to hackers.
I want to see a thorough defense of restricting user choice on the net by this time tomorrow. Your essay must have no less than 1,000 words, at least three Zune references, and at least one reference to Ballmer throwing chairs. Bonus points if you make a reference to the Borg.
Also, don't forget the graphs and sound bites.
Apple says "If you've modified your phone in an unsupported way, the next firmware update may brick it."
The firmware is released, and only installed if you allow it to be.
What is the problem here? Anyone who bricked their phone did it to themselves. Or are you just super-anti-corporate man?
Slashdot - where whining about luck is the new way to make the world you want.
First you have to make the distinction between "hacked" and "unlocked". Many of us have "hacked" our iPhones to add third party applications, customize the interface, etc., but have not unlocked it to use with a non-ATT SIM card. It's the unlocking that really screws you. I've been reading all the forums on this to decide what to do about mine, and the vast majority of people who have hacked but not unlocked are able to apply the update with no problems; however it does restore your iPhone to factory state and you lose all your third party apps. The new firmware has not been cracked yet, so you can't as of yet reinstall them.
I have read isolated reports of people who have hacked/not unlocked phones being bricked and even nonhacked phones. In my reading it seems most of these folks had some sort of SIM issue prior to the update, e.g. replacing the SIM with a nonoriginal for some reason or another.
The unofficial apple weblog is reporting that despite warnings posted all over the apple store genius bar employees have been quietly swapping out bricked phones.
Intrinsically evil.... or possibly an erroneous fluke of a mess up best not to get upset about. Obviously the update wasn't meant to brick locked phones. If it did, it was an accident, not par for the course. My locked phone updated just fine. As with ANY software update, including open source ones, there will be a small number of systems adversely affected.
With a proprietary vendor you can take it back for repairs or replacement. How exactly will the "l33t dudes" in #linux on IRC help you in your time of need if you don't know how to fix your free software problem yourself?
Mac OS X and Windows XP working side by side to fight back the night.
Please people, let's quit talking like newbies.
If you drop your iPhone in the toilet, or if you microwave it, it will become bricked.
If you simply fudge it up, to the point where it needs to be restored, it is not bricked. Especially if all the other functions on it function.
I know that there are a lot of Apple haters out here, but we don't need to be confusing tech terms.
We all know what a brick is, and what a recoverable system is.
That being said, why the fuck would they apply an update to a hacked and unlocked phone? Hmm, maybe I'll remove my catalyc converter and ask my certified mechanic to keep working on it. You think he'd agree to that? (just to use a car analogy.)
If you don't know what AltaVista is (was), get off my lawn.
Remember when the first generation of Windows-ready iPod's came out, which came with MusicMatch Jukebox? Steve extolled it's virtues ... only to release iTunes for Windows a year or so later. My guess is that Apple will eventually become a carrier, but just weren't ready to dive into that business Quite Yet. Just give it time, they'll stab AT&T in the back.
"He who would learn astronomy, and other recondite arts, let him go elsewhere. " -- John Calvin, commenting on Genesis 1
It's not at all a matter of law, nor is this particular case a matter of property ownership.
The law: It's not illegal to sell or license someone a good or service with ridiculous terms attached, so long as the terms themselves are legal and in good faith and the buying party is aware (or can reasonably be made aware) of them. People are actually dumb enough to 'buy' stuff that they don't own or can't control. That's the uneducated market at work for you.
But this isn't even a matter of ownership. It is pretty crystal clear that you OWN your iPhone. You paid money to buy the hardware, you paid money to license the software, and you pay money to use the cellular bandwidth for calls and data.
If the software stops working (IE, Apple releases a new firmware/OS that breaks the core functionality of the original, unmodified device), you might be able to get Apple to fix/replace the phone. If AT&T/SBC decides they're not going to offer you cellular service anymore, they have to let you out of your contract without penalty. If you decide to take your $500 iPhone and hit it with a hammer to see what kind of noise it will make, well that's you're problem.
It's not like if you hack your iPhone, Apple comes to your door and accuses you of destroying their property. You didn't. It's your phone to do with as you please. But the contract you signed probably said something to the effect that they will only support unhacked/unmodified/etc. phones.
Bad car analogy: I own a Jeep. I bought it new and it is under warranty. If I drive it responsibly and follow the scheduled maintenance protocols, it will stay under warranty for another 2 years. I did put a suspension lift on it; and in doing so replaced and/or modified factory suspension components. I have no expectation that Chrysler will honor the factory warranty for any part of the suspension now, mine or theirs. And that's fine. If the engine throws a rod, you bet damn right I expect Chrysler to fix it under warranty, as it is completely unrelated to the suspension. If, while putting the lift on, I bent the frame or broke an axle, how is that Chrysler's fault? If the suspension modifications indeed were incompatible with the Jeep, how is that Chrysler's problem? They sold me a working product under very clear terms. I chose to make my own changes to it.
You definitely own the phone. You license/lease the software and service, respectively.
Message contains 1 attachment: spam.gif
You're being a little silly here. I don't think that anyone is going to argue that the AT&T service is pretty bad and also a little infuriating. But that is the contract entered into when you bought an iPhone. You knew this going into it. Honestly, I'm surprised that Apple had the decency to warn people in advance that the update would remove the unlocking. I'm not calling it bricking, because bricking would assume that a legitimately purchased phone that was still in contract is no longer working due to the update.
Essentially, you're bitching because you made up your own rules to play with, and Apple is playing a whole different game. I'm not saying that you don't have a right to the technology you own. If Apple sent out an update on Macbooks which forced you to use Appleworks instead of any other office suite, you'd have a right to be angry. You didn't sign up for any contract which said you couldn't or that you had to use Apple's program.
That isn't the case with the iPhone. You entered into a contract knowingly (it was most definitely during the purchase), so what is the point of bitching when you've already broken the rules. Technically, Apple didn't have to tell you, or even hint that a phone would be reverted to an unlocked state. They've been polite; you're the one being a bit unreasonable, in my opinion.
Um, no, you hack your phone, and a re-install of the upgraded OS reverts it to an un-hacked state. Nothing surprising, evil, or permission-ish about it.
Apple doesn't care if you want to play Tetris on your iPhone. They _do_ have to pretend to care that you want to go with a carrier other than who they have a contract with (AT&T). So if you did something to change who you go through as a carrier, and since Apple didn't write the hack, they don't promise how it'll act going forward.
What else could they do? They have to keep their business partners happy for legal reasons, and how in the world could they support a third-party hack they didn't write? I don't think it's reasonable to think that they should have to do a full regression testing of every version of every unlocking hack out there. In fact, I'd prefer they don't. I'd rather they spend their time working on features for the mainstream, and let those who unlock their phone do so with the understanding that they unlock hack may not work after you upgrade the software.
No -- Apple offers a firmware upgrade and users choose whether to install it. There's no requirement to install the firmware upgrade. It's entirely optional. It's not being forced on the phone nor automatically installed. If you prefer to run your own software on the iPhone then don't install the new Apple software.
Apple doesn't have a duty to make sure its software is compatible with every other piece of software that could conceivably be run on the iPhone. If you want to use Apple software then use Apple software. If you want to use other software then use other software. But there's no way to get the best of both worlds -- to modify the OS and then expect Apple to support it.
They _do_ have to pretend to care that you want to go with a carrier other than who they have a contract with (AT&T).
Wow, you drank the Kool-Aid. It seems AT&T pays Apple for each subscriber on a monthly basis, how much and what for are in dispute. In your twisted representation, Apple would love nothing more to allow you to go elsewhere but for some other reason, AT&T would cry. Based on my reading, I see that Apple wants the single vendor relationship for its own benefit. The reality is Apple would lose the monthly fee for every subscriber not using AT&T. With at least 1 million phones and a few bucks a month ads up to a decent monthly income for Apple. If you do not think that is the reason, you need to take off the Apple glasses and look again.
Here are some links
http://www.unstrung.com/document.asp?doc_id=133945
http://www.macnn.com/articles/07/07/19/piper.iphone.income.share/
http://www.news.com/8301-10784_3-9747031-7.html
http://macdailynews.com/index.php/weblog/comments/14997/
You can search for Apple revenue sharing AT&T and read more. To think that Apple would not pursue similar kick back deals in other countries would be naive as well.
"It's like people acting surprised that Microsoft installed a stealth update that's wrecked a few systems, even when they turned off automatic updates."
Actually, it's not like that at all. The imminent arrival of the iPhone update was well-publicized, the possible negative consequences (for those who actively chose to circumvent the warranted use of the device) were well-publicized, and the update procedure itself includes a warning and the option not to install the update.
"Perhaps a few more people will now understand why closed proprietary is intrinsically evil, regardless of whether it's actually convenient for you right now or not."
I don't see anything in this story to support your questionable definition of evil. Perhaps a few more people will now understand why heeding warnings (as in waiting to update later or not updating at all -- or even, God forbid, purchasing a device that does what you want it to instead of hoping to make it something it isn't and getting enraged when your experiment hits a bump in the road) is a good idea.
they're doing something to check for "tampered" phones, but still running the update anyway. There's a bunch of things Apple could have done differently, from simply not running the update to requesting that the user put the correct data in then load the new improved lock software. Like you said, the phone is not "bricked" but they deliberately leave an error they refuse to correct at the shop.
In my opinion that is "malicious prosecution" of the contract terms. Because the phone still physically works it is obvious that the phone COULD be fixed, Apple is refusing. Also, the update does not stop if it will fail.. To use a car analogy, this would be like having an unwarranted mod, nox, stereo equipment on your ride. When you take the car in for a routine oil change they say you're out of warranty.. and cut the offending parts off your car with a chainsaw rendering it undriveable.. when you drove it into the shop just fine. Then telling you that it's "your problem" it's not under warranty.
Apple is clearly self destructing at an alarming rate. Products with half-implemented features, then locked down to ridiculous levels (with out any features) releasing new versions without looking after current customers (I had the 20G photo they stopped updating after 3 months when 30GB video came out... very poor service after the purchase) The iPhone and Touch seem to be the top though. The pricing, and service locks, lack of development platform even after it was cracked... the $200 price drop at 60 days, dud screens on Touch, now disabling the devices. Somebody is getting high off those fumes from the freshly printed money they're raking in. Not to mention they sacrificed their core OS Leopard to make this "innovation" happen? I like Tiger better than Win XP but Leopard is way late... should have been out in the spring and it's holding up development for the core group of Apple fanbois that just want to do cool stuff.
Why should they make sure their software does something special in the presence of third-party hacks they don't support? Supporting means endorsing, and endorsing means violating their contract with AT&T.
As to your antique iPod - the only updates are going to be bugfixes. Actually, MOST firmware updates are bugfixes. No updates = no bugs to fix, plus they (and neither do most companies) owe their customers anything to increase the value of OLD products when they could release new instead.
All of this talk of being "required" to sign a contract is bogus. You can activate an iPhone without signing up for a 2-year contract.
I have a co-worker who did exactly this; he was told how to do it by a sales associate at the store he purchased it from. This is not illegal in any way; AT&T lets you do month-to-month on all of their plans in this manner, if you buy the phone first. Given that the iPhone price is not subsidized by the contract in any way, shape or form, why tie yourself into a contract?
When you activate the iPhone in iTunes, enter all 9's for your Social Security number. You'll fail the credit check (duh!) and you will be told you can either go to an AT&T store to talk to a representative or you can go month-to-month.
Given how much whining people have done about being "forced" to sign a with AT&T contract in order to use an iPhone, you would think that month-to-month thing would be being shouted from the rooftops. Are iPhone-bashers just ignoring inconvenient facts?
A bricked iPhone can be returned for a full switch... Correct me if I am wrong, but its not like they can tell the phone has been "unlocked", as I have not opened this phone in any way, and as such have not voided any warrenty on the hardware.
If you check the comments here, you see one particular comment of interest:
You see, they can tell,
Which means: You're iScrewed if you update... and I TOLD YOU SO. A month ago, long before any announcement by Apple... Steve said no unlocking. Even though he's wrong this time, he's stubbornly sticking to his guns like always. Maybe you'd like to buy a real smartphone when you get that bad taste out of your mouth. For God's sake, whatever you do, don't say, "Thank you sir may I have another."I have always despised the iPod. Massively overpriced etc... However, with the iPod Touch, bloody Steve Jobs has finally made me want an iPod. (I have absolutely no use for an iPhone). But I have no delusions of being able to run third party apps or whatever on it. I want it for what it does out of the box. Anything else down the line is an added bonus.
As for the iPhone... The early adopters got burned with the price drop. And now the people who hacked their phones can't do what they want to do with their precious toy. I'm sorry, but I find that quite amusing. I realise this will be an unpopular opinion, but Apple is a business like any other. If they want to cripple third party apps for now, that's entirely their choice and, sadly, their right. Anyone who harbors the delusion that when they buy a device they actually own it and can do what they want has clearly not been paying attention to any technology of the last 5-10 years.
It's not like Apple didn't warn folk this was coming, which is a hell of a lot more than other companies have done.
This is the biggest rant piece of crap I've ever read in my life.
Let me make this clear: If you don't agree with the T&C's for the iPhone, then don't purchase one
It is that simple. Don't like it. Vote with your $$ !!
Why is this so difficult for some people? Are some people born to rage against a machine that they have a choice to not pay money to?
Lindsay Blanton
RadioReference.com
Yeah, you're right, that would be dumb.
It would be something else altogether when I would come back only to discover my car was rendered full unusable (far below the state it was in when I brought it in for maintainance) because some dipsh*t thought my modification gave him the right to molest my car any way he saw fit.
That is something quite different than returning the car unchanged, because preliminary checking showed an incompatibility with the requested maintanance.
Funny : when I only dare to shorthen an URL and thereby retrieve a webpage that was not intended for my eyes I can get send to jail for hacking, but when some company intentionally subverts or disables software running on anything I own its allways rightfully. Did I say "funny" ? I actually ment "strange"
Incompetence. Apple hasn't done anything really clever technically in a long, long time. They rely on 'creative design,' attractive appearances, and heavy heavy marketing.
They weren't even able to turn MacOS into a modern pre-emptive multitasking OS. They ended up having to buy in a third party OS from NeXT, after spending many millions in failed attempts.
One of the most difficult things to engineer into a portable device is a robust battery compartment that can use commercial off-the-shelf _standard_ batteries. It's a lazy cop-out to seal the batteries into a product. I know, because I worked for years at a medical device manufacturer where we struggled with a design to let the customer use a simple off-the-shelf 9v battery. It's an EXPENSIVE and difficult undertaking. Again, Apple really isn't competent enough to design a robust battery compartment. My Newton, which is fine in other regards, has a botched battery compartment.
Microsoft says legacy (serial/parallel) ports are bad. They don't obfuscate the hardware enough.